[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: About column numbers
From: |
Clément Pit--Claudel |
Subject: |
Re: About column numbers |
Date: |
Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:44:38 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 |
On 03/31/2016 02:50 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> (it would break some code, but most of it is already fundamentally
> broken because it should use `point-min` rather than hardcoding 1, so
> it's not *that* terrible).
Amusingly, always using (point-min) also leads to interesting bugs. For
example, Proof General uses one large overlay to indicate which part of a
buffer has been processed. When updated, that overlay is set to cover
(point-min) to (end of last processed statement). Of course, when narrowing is
in effect, this means that the overlay is made to start at the lowest narrowed
point; then when the buffer is widened, you realize that the bounds of the
overlay are wrong.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: About column numbers, (continued)
- Re: About column numbers, psachin, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Angelo Graziosi, 2016/03/30
- RE: About column numbers, Drew Adams, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Yuri Khan, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Andreas Schwab, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Yuri Khan, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Andreas Schwab, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Yuri Khan, 2016/03/30
- Re: About column numbers, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/31
- Re: About column numbers,
Clément Pit--Claudel <=
- Re: About column numbers, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/31